Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The article title is confusing architects with structural engineers.



Yep, but the issue is that in "modern times" the two professions were divided.

Up to roughly the end of the 19th century (and in some cases even in the early 1900's) an architect was also a structural engineer, and a structural engineer also an architect (and BTW in the classical times the architect was also the structural engineer and the site director, in some cases even the builder/contractor).

The gap between the two professions has become - in my experience - wider, and with the (needed) addition of other professional and "specialized" figures (geologists, plant engineers, etc.) each profession has become narrower in scope, to the point that sometimes it is difficult to have an architect and a structural engineer communicate properly, as they each lack a "global" vision on a project.


On the other hand, some architects could stand to learn quite a bit from structural engineers...


>On the other hand, some architects could stand to learn quite a bit from structural engineers...

... and viceversa.

As said above as I see it the real issue is the (modern) separation/specialization of those professions.


It is also confusing in the sense that it uses the term "sound engineering" with 'sound' being the 'good/sturdy' definition, whereas the whole phrase is interchangeable with a field of study within architecture(sound/acoustic engineering)


That threw me; I wondered all the way through when the author was finally going to get around to the part about acoustics.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: